Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29618719›Full record

ReviewThe American journal of case reports2018

Cervical Esophagotomy for Foreign Body Extraction: A Case Report and Extensive Literature Review of the Last 20 Years.

Pasquale Cianci, Nicola Tartaglia, Amedeo Altamura, Alessandra Di Lascia, Alberto Fersini, Vincenzo Neri, Antonio Ambrosi

Open access · hybridAbstract readCase ReportsReview
In one paragraph

Review in The American journal of case reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Migrated Foreign Body of Upper Digestive Tract-A Ten-Year Institutional Experience.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Trauma Coagulopathy and Its Outcomes.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020
    Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pasquale CianciDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.
Nicola TartagliaDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.
Amedeo AltamuraDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.
Alessandra Di LasciaDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.
Alberto FersiniDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.
Vincenzo NeriDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.
Antonio AmbrosiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.
University of Foggia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND Voluntary and involuntary ingestion of foreign bodies is a common condition; in most cases they pass through the digestive tract, but sometimes they stop, creating emergency situations for the patient. We report a case of meat bolus with cartilaginous component impacted in the cervical esophagus, with a brief literature review. CASE REPORT A 64-year-old man came to our attention for retention in the cervical esophagus of a piece of meat accidentally swallowed during lunch. After a few attempts of endoscopic removal carried out previously in other hospitals, the patient has been treated by us with a cervical esophagotomy and removal of the foreign body, without any complications. We checked the database of PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library from January 2007 to January 2017 in order to verify the presence of randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, retrospective studies, and case series regarding the use of the cervical esophagotomy for the extraction of foreign bodies impacted in the esophagus. CONCLUSIONS The crucial point is to differentiate the cases that must be immediately treated from those requiring simple observation. Endoscopic treatment is definitely the first therapeutic option, but in case of failure of this approach, in our opinion, cervical esophagotomy could be a safe, easy, viable, durable approach for the extraction of foreign bodies impacted in the cervical esophagus. Our review does not have the purpose of providing definitive conclusions but is intended to represent a starting point for subsequent studies.

Indexed as

EsophagusDeglutitionEndoscopy, GastrointestinalEsophagectomyForeign BodiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeckRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID29618719
PMCPMC5900799
OpenAlexW2796140533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.